Jump to content

john collins

Members
  • Posts

    366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by john collins
 
 
  1. Bloody hell guys ! The only thing I hope I have definitely achieved is that it is very apparent that there are different views If you look back at my very first email - I asked if someone could co-ordinate the views on various classes and give us a list or starting point. You will note I put " good luck with that " , I was not being sarcastic ( well perhaps I was a bit) but many years of experience has shown how difficult it is One think I hope some of you may understand ( some never will as their knowledge of ho it all works is deficient to say least) is that an ACU C/tee of 8 have always struggled to sort all this, just as many of you are obvious now doing The posts arrive at no conclusion - and I suggest it was unfair at outset of those to slag us off, when it is now obvious that there will never be agreement- we just have to try things , and that does not always work, hence the attempt to review A few other points - I get mightily peed off with the constant reference to te ACU should do this or that. Some of you may believe it is some huge corporate body or something - it is not, it is guys , trying to do their best across board. Any of you can apply to join and do your bit just as the 8 do We do not get paid , we give up a days work to attend meetings and spend many many hours a week trawling through emails and problems and disputes and most importantly trying to ensure that the sport carries on with all the outside pressure it faces - so no more slagging off please , constructive comments, fine, constructive criticism fine , but remember the ACU is us - all of us. Anyone in a Club/ Centre, rider or organiser. The clue is in the last letter Union ( all of us) Now a few points to get back to real world - some have made very good comments on some of these The organisers have a whole load of things to do as anyone who has organised knows. I have already covered this. They are very unlikely to be able to set up some sort of MOT facility and check all the eligibility that some would like a la Classic TT - it just ain't going to happen Equally , there is very little chance of the machine examiner being to accurately establish what is 62, 63, 64 , 65 and so on - these bods are not not out there. They are at home writing about it So, of course there can be some eligibility factors . In past Twinshocks, drum brakes, carb, for diameter have ben used in past. But they will be limited UNLESS AN EXPERT OE EXPERT CAN BE FOUND TO GO AROUND ALL ROUNDS _ AND CHECK This is exactly what is SUPPOSED to happen at thus years Vintage ISDE in Spain . There is a strict criteria format and in principle there will be " Expert checkers" and if machines are not eligible, it is back in van and head for border ( we will see if that works?) As far as we are concerned I am far from sure that in then real world riders actually want that , but even if they do how can it be achieved ? Next, a few have probably hit nail on head and stated that if sections are correct, and suitable for classes whatever they may be, the problem is reduced. Absolutely spot on BUT - Organisers vary and always will. No-one sets out to cock it up, but is does occasionally happen What do we do then - sack them ? Not possible they are volunteers in first place doing it for love of sport Not give them a round again - possible, but that results in extremely reduced events and please remember that always always, for everyone who thinks a round that someone things was too hard, too tight, too long, too short, there will be others thinking it too easy, not tight enough, too short etc It is not an exact science From what I have seen and read in surveys ( and they were a bit like I have just said - alternate views mostly) Some want a return to the British Bike era - ie original concept and leave modern twinshocks go elsewhere Some want to retain Twinshocks and have classes for them Some one all mixed in and allow course sections to sort out Some want harder sections for better riders Some want strict machine eligibility rules Some want little or no eligibilty rules - "ride what you brung" Some want classes divided up according to age of riders rather than machines Some want all Off road Some want all On road Many want a mixture So it goes on - thanks for efforts ( I do mean that ) C/tee will now try to start with an fresh piece of paper and come up with something BUT we will still need organisers I have a return trip to Bradford now to try to discuss next years World Trial with FIM representatives - should be easy after this !!
  2. Thanks for posts All will be read and added in to previous surveys , comments, etc before classes are finalised I do know form experience that there is one big problem with some of classes suggested, which in themselves sound ok and that is te policing of it Someone said it is easy to tell if a bike is such and such ? I am not so sure. Certainly there are classic experts out there who know all this and can tell year/ modifications and so on. Unfortunately these people will not be at event ( unless someone wishes to volunteer ? serous question - ) Organisers rarely have the time or inclination, they have much to do on a morning and machine examiner often is just that - checking normal things and not necessarily an expert into the exact dimensions of a frame etc. Fork diameter is easier and i think we will certainly re-instate this I have to say in past, whatever rules we made, ie Pre this or that or certain forks or carbs , many seem to have taken a great delight in circumnavigating the rules, and I am not sure why that should be Our aim is not to provide classes to give some an excuse to get around them ( cheat could be another word for it ?) People have modified bikes, and always will but there has to be a degree of responsibility and sportsmanship surely? Anyway, thanks for replies, as stated they will all be read. I am not sure if we can come up with some sort of consensus as even when you read these posts there is great variation We will study again before making a decision.
  3. Hi guys I think it can be seen the diversity of views re classes etc This has really always been the problem. many views and while almost all are valid, it is easy to get into a mess Just a few things that we as T & E have to consider There is a huge difference in last few years with running events. Not least the MSA Approval required if part of event goes on road , the S33 Local Authority approval even for off road parts. The bureaucracy - and yes ACU are responsible for much of it ( good topic for another post ! as that is far from easy to digest) I have been Clerk of Course for a whole range of event ranging from the old Sebac series classic type events to British Championships and World Championships . Across the range, therefore a club that puts on event - any events has a lot to do and a lot of responsibility to take. Far more than ever before Therefore, they require a good entry to make an event both viable and justify the work. Most do not do it to make money but work on a break even situation across the season The problem has been that while some classes have diminished for all sorts of reasons, in order to maintain viability - and for T & E to get organisers who wish to run a Champ event, there has undoubtedly been an influx of more and more classes and sometimes Specials ( and that word in itself can be used in many more classes than just that titled class?) If you ride one of these .eg Spanish Twinshock - one is happy If you ride a more standard British Bike, it is very easy to feel the sections etc are marked to suit them and the pleasure can go out f it all and hence participation of the older bikes I am quite attracted to the idea of returning to a more British Bike series = but will it get entries and will organisers come forward? I can only presume that the authors of many of these posts are hard working members of their own clubs like T & E members are. Can we togeteht persuade our Clubs to apply for a round It is chicken and egg situation. If we revert more to original concepts, entries may flood in, but if they do not at least at initial stages organisers are might peed off and not surprisingly those from classes then excluded soon say - what did you expect when you took our classes away ? A conundrum ? Which is why I initially asked for classes that people want There are some good responses, but they do intend to be from a limited number of contributors We will continue reading throughout the day and then try to collate the view with thos already sent in
  4. Thank you for two positive posts. I will take on board as will other T & E members Things are never quite as simple, as from our point of view we have to have organisers and that is our first remit i.e to invite applications. I will not expand at moment as hopefully there will be other views, but none will be ignored
  5. Guys There seems to be more interest in analysis , surveys and the like and how it all went wrong in past, and ACU should allow someone else to do it – fine – get on with it. if you are volunteering send me a name and address and we will involve you . What I have not seen is many positive suggestions about future , and many realistic comments about how it all needs to work Consultation to end of year ? Sounds great put unrealistic . Perhaps we need to consider how things actually work: This may be good as it should certainly be known regardless of which type of event Clubs /Centres have to apply for rounds. It does not matter if they are SM or Solo British Championship or anything else. In order to do this, they need some idea of format etc. Which is where we are at present – actually doing it. Many clubs now no longer meet on a weekly basis, often perhaps a couple of time or even once a month Clubs and Centres require a their calendars fixed by about first week in Nov ( Many meet on Remembrance Sunday for final sort but many say that is too late) It is not just about various Championships for them, they obviously put these in first, but then have to fit in all normal Centre & Club events around them. This is important for land, observers and so on. They want Centre Calendars to go to printers and so on and so forth. They want them compiled as early as possible So they want it finalised start Nov if possible ( often it is not) When applications for all the Championships are sent in , inevitably there are clashes and the they have to be resolved. Clubs are re-contacted, but of course people are in work, have to consult with others in their club at next meeting and so on. Once applications are in it will probably take about 4 weeks to get it all fixed – and that is being extremely optimistic. It is easy to think that a SM round or anything else will not be affected by something which is completely different to it – i.e Keedewell British Championship , or even UK World round – but that is not correct. Often Club members who actually do work, observe and ride in other events some completely different types, may not be available on a certain date so club that need them cannot clash with events which at first glance can seem to be no problem. This is often case in my own club. It is easy to think these events just happen by magic – they do not. All that is fact – accept it or not , but it is. This means that first applications really need to be back from organisers by end of Sept. This means we are actually already on late side , as they are not sent out yet so consultation to end of year is not going to happen. It is going to be days Ah I hear you ask, why not start sooner ? Many reasons but not least as at present we still await FIM World Trial dates, FIM Europe Trials dates and these in turn affect RT Keedweel Champ, Ladies & Girls Champ, & Youth Champ. Some ( who probably know very little about how events actually happen may think that is not important – as I have explained it is. The reason I offered you the chance to put forward view was that someone had prematurely put on TC a suggested format that was not confirmed, so rather than have huge debate about that I suggested those with some definite views on how it should be for 2017 put them down. It does seem however many are more interested in talking the talk rather than suggesting anything That is fine, if you just want the excuse of not contributing just keep impressing people with your knowledge of past , and how you would have done it differently. I do not accept that anyone presently involved cannot do this – if they want to. I too rode Sammy Miler round for many years, and at any given time I am sure I would have had an opinion of what classes etc there should be. Who should be catered for ? We have this discussion in our club almost every week If you need time to think about it, or are put out as you did not do a survey or are more interested on analysis of past, where it went wrong then fine , leave it alone. There are about 120 riders who have scored points in the various classes in 2016 , and we could just leave these alone, and I could be down pub. However, as I said earlier those who wish to by Monday suggest the classes they would like to see , the opportunity is there. Up to you if you wish to take it. I have written this tonight, you can do same and also Sunday and Monday So, for those interested in positives rather than negatives. Your starter for 10 1) There will be no Sammy Miller series in 2017 2) There will be an ACU Classic series subject to organisers and dates being sorted within a week or two) 3) There will be an opportunity for some “ Off road applications” - max number of laps and min distance 4) The format will be hopefully be sent out to potential organisers within days What type of carb, wheels, hubs, frames and so on are not at present the burning issues – these can come later and yes there can if you like be more consultation At present what is needs is : 5) What Classes & How many routes ? Respond on point 5 if you wish , that is starting point but by Monday afternoon John Collins
  6. Guys This all very interesting, but I am afraid is also all very premature, so I need to put record straight . There was a survey carried out – I believe it was sent out to those who are riding series That is important. If you are not riding or involved the series, it may interesting to express your opinions, but that is what they are, opinions , to which of course you are entitled, but please do not expect them to have more validity than those taking part. However, like lots of surveys there are varying views , and often they reflect what a particular person feels, which may be valid, but next person has totally different take on topic. Even worse , there can be a tendency when a view does not come to fruition that those who genuinely completed survey, feel slighted or ignored . This is problem with such things “ Everyone wants a certain set of rules as long as it is theirs” Ok That is the history Now. Surveys have been read. Some of the views you express here will also be read at least WHOEVER PUBLISHED THE PROPOSALS WAS INCORRECT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN FINALISED. THEY ARE WORK IN PROGRESS I SUSPECT THERE MAY WELL BE SEVERAL CHANGES, THE FINAL FORMAT WILL BE ANNOUNCED IN DUE COURSE. IT IS VERY EASY ON WEB SIGHTS AND Fu ….. BOOK to say how things should or should not be done I have a suggestion which is better than any survey if you are serious in your quest to help ONE PERSON - and ONE only on this site ( preferably someone who rides in SM series ) acts like a co-ordinator. That person wants to be announced on this TC forum . That person needs to volunteer and start ball rolling – all others respond to their post with suggestions Put together all the various views expressed over next few days – say until Monday ( good luck with that!) and see if a conclusion about classes and routes and machines can be formulated Once that is done - I 100% promise you that T & E will give very very serious consideration to that ONE proposal which has been drawn together from all your various TC views Email it to me or just publish on a post ( I will check for it on Monday) So – Step 1 - A volunteer on TC to collate all the views. By all means discuss/ debate/argue Step 2 - By Monday a final draft of the views collated into I set of regulations posted Step 3 - Those collated views to be put forward as ONE proposal from TC posters to be considered with equal validity to all proposals so far Over to you all John Collins T & E Chairman
  7. As many will know I used to spend a huge amount of time posting on TC and generally it was time well spent as I felt it was good to inform people of actual facts, yes argue a few points and hopefully have serious debate There were two things that have curtailed this, firstly lack of time due to the many hours spent each day/evening working on ACU Trials and Enduro issues as do other C/tee members, but that is only one thing The real killer for me however was when a few posters just seem to take delight in posting any comment that enters their head without any thought, justification or accuracy or truth as long as they can knock ACU. Rarely do they provide information of what they actually " do" for our sport. Telecat has given about the best example of this when he claims without knowledge or substance that there is no point going to an ACU meeting as no-one listens and nothing changes Leaving aside the fact that my and other C/tee members unpaid time is as valuable as his, but we are prepared to spend it trying to do something rather than just post silly comments, I would suspect that what he actually means is: " I once had an idea / view point, but because not everyone thought it was as brilliant as I thought , I have arrived at the conclusion that there is no point having another thought as no-one will listen/ action in any meeting" However, Telecat is of course entitled to his opinion, but before he throws such comment about is he prepared to back it up If he is prepared to pledge £1 to Cancer Research for every instance I can provide where someone in an ACU Forum or meeting or email/letter has made a suggestion which has then been considered and then implemented - and he can if he wishes confine himself to BC - to save some money or go wider if his pockets are deep. I will of course provide suggestion made by not only organisers but also BC riders and others It will take me time , I will forego my night in the local But as we say down here - " Put up or shut Up" John Collins
  8. Hi - teewoyonesevenfoyve You have received some very god advice on here from people who seem to know what they are talking abot In particular I thin k it was a good suggestion to go and visit a trial to get a few of what is involved Re Trials Registration - If you feel more comfortable getting things sorted out on an individual basis, rather than just trying to make head or tail of a form that may not cater for your needs - just phone ACU Licence Dept again - give my name and ask them to take your full contact details and get them to contact me and I will arrange for someone with exact knowledge to contact you and guide you through
  9. Charlie Prescott: Yes - I tend to agree with you. And we intend to look across all classes. BUT - the problem is ( and always seems to have been) trying to cater for all in what was initially a Classic or actually PRE 65 BRITISH series. As stated clearly above we intend to review the whole think toward the end of 2015 , and those with definite views on what classes should be now have plenty of chance to post on this site and see if they can get some agreement, and we can take note However - please remember while I am Chairman of T & E , I am one voice and we are a total of 8 and these must all have a say and will no doubt, like all the contributors to these posts have different views. This is as it should be, and I hope always will be. It would actually be a pretty boring world if we all thought the same One of my own personnel opinions is that it cannot be logical that people can compete on highly modified Spanish/ Italian bikes ( and I am a Bultaco arch enthusiast of 40 plus years) but if someone takes a Chinese engine ( God forbid) and makes something around it - then it is not OK We need to sort some classes to take account of this However, unfortunately what often happens, is people make or buy a bike - and I have already said I applaud innovation - but then expect classes to be altered to cater for them . The correct method would probably be to look at classes first and proceed from there, or try to persuade us and everyone that classes should be altered well before a season staerts Classic Trials are not alone in this dilema. KTM produced an excellent 144cc Enduro bike. So did TM There was no class in any British Enduro Championship for those who bought them to ride it in - they had a bike they could not ride, at least not in Championships, and while we have now eventually altered classes to allow them in, it was once again wrong way round. Indeed in European and World Enduro inc Indoor Enduro there is still no class/no ride for a 144cc machine So, message is really, yes things have to be looked at but cart before horse rarely works out for anyone
  10. There seem to be many posts on this subject which seem to be getting quite a few people embroiled in various arguments, innuendo and accusation. In my opinion the most sensible post expresses the opinion that it is time everyone just got on with enjoying the actual riding of the trials, stopped moaning about what everyone else is doing and based the result of how many times they stopped or put foot down, which is what we all thought trials was about surely? Unfortunately there is also a fair bit of miss information circulating, and perhaps it is worth putting this correct: There were changes made to the Sammy Miller series for 2015 and the intention was as stated in italics in the PR which was circulated and which I paste below. While the intention as stated, was perhaps good, the inclusion of the 50 machines etc was not so good and this attempt at sorting one problem resulted in causing more. So for 2015 - note the date. The part in bold was introduced. People need to actually read this, but also note what the last para states i.e that a complete review will take place for 2016. Therefore for 2015 we will have to work with what we have, which I will come back to later. Re – 2016 – yes there will be a review and we will have some ideas Will it solve all the problems and make everyone happy ? Doubtful , More chance of a lottery win. Why- Because too many want a set of regulations, as long as they suit them. Do not take my word for it , just look back over the posts on such matters past and present and it is very easy to see the diversity of opinion. When we introduced a Special Class that many are suggesting – we had complaints Some riders who we would probably regard as riding “ Specials” insisted on circumnavigating the rules to continue riding in the original classes? Pot hunters ? Probably. The problem with a Special class is defining exactly what is a “ Special” and what is not, and as I have stated some who certainly should know better take a delight in finding a loophole BEWARE : All this may be controversial stuff may be fun for some – BUT the real problem that some others have sensibly mentioned, is that all this is likely to pee- off organisers and it eventually will. Any organiser of any trial knows how much work is involved, finding a venue, marking the sections, finding Observers, producing results and so on, to make at the end of the day the cash they would achieve running a small boot sale. Those who like to comment on what everyone else should do, but never actually get involved in running an event in any shape or form or part of the problem not solution. Wake up lads, you are going to put another nail in the coffin if you expect these hard working organisers to also examine machines in the minutest of details to determine if they belong in the class they have entered. These are Classic trials which are supposed to be enjoyable for all. It ain’t the TT. For the pundits who at each and every opportunity have all the answers , why do not some of you volunteer to go to the events and be a specific Machine examiner. If we have volunteers I will try to set this up, including some expense for your travel. Any takers? That would make any 2016 review far easier. japes 1275 comments about ACU being paid to sort all this out, merely shows how totally out of touch he really is and probably still believes in Father Xmas. If my payment from ACU totals enough for a pint during 2015 I will be absolutely delighted. However I could be wrong, and he may have the answers, when he speaks about MSA regulations, great- lead by some example, produce your version of what should go in the ACU book – us highly paid bods will have an easy time just inserting it – job done. To make things easy, why not do as a few others have done ( unfortunately without that much agreement from others) ) on TC put down the definitive description of what the classes should be, and see if we can get some sort of agreement. Back in the real world. We made changes to try to accommodate all. A silly article in the press tried to indicate that Jon Bliss was being prevented from riding etc This was not true, and that is certainly not what is wanted. I actually applaud those who think a bit outside the box and try to produce something a bit different. I ride one. The question really is does a particular machine fit into the existing Championship classes. For any machines that did not we introduced the two Non Championship classes , one on each route so that no-one was refused a ride. We will examine all this again for 2016. Iis it not time we had a bit of self discipline in our sport. We are mostly at an age where we should be leading by example. Does it really necessitate all this aggravation and conjecture as to if a bike has this or that. We have two routes - A & B determining severity. Just enter one of them, and if anyone has any doubts about the validity of their own bike, just enter the Non Championship class and enjoy your day. The results sheet will show how you fared against others , and after all is that not all we really require Now as below for 215 and so there can be no doubt For Classes 3 & 6 : Twinshock, Drum Brakes and not eligible for Class 2 or 5 respectively AND AN ORIGINAL OR REPLICA /SILHOUETTE FRAME OF A MACHIME COMMECIALLY AVAILABLE AND ADVERTISED PRIOR TO 1990. The twin shock and drum brakes should be easy to determine. The latter is where it gets controversial – perhaps. If it “ looks” like the machine it purports to represent – we can regard it as a replica/ silhouette If it does not – or just has a bit if it looks like the original – it cannot be deemed to be a replica/ silhouette Therefore, it must follow a machime not complying with these three things must go into Non Championship class, either on Route A or Rouite B Enjoyable day out, but no Championship points John Collins Chairman ACU T & E The intention of the amendments made to the classes of the ACU Sammy Miller Trial Championship was an attempt to bring the classes of Twinshock machines, which often had the Replica or Silhouette descriptions, into line with the other British Bike classes which have been in existence for many years. The desire was, and still is, to prevent modern mono machines being converted to Twinshocks and also to confirm that a Replica should be just that i.e a Replica of something previously made and in line with the overall philosophy of the Series. The age of a rider, capacity of any particular machine is not a relevant argument against this attempt. However it does appear that the introduction of the words “50 machines” has caused concern and therefore for 2015 the criteria for CLASSES 3 & 6 will be: For machines with twin-shock rear suspension and drum brakes as at the time of manufacture which are not eligible for class 2 and 5. All machines must have original frames or have replica/silhouette frames of machines that were commercially available and advertised prior to 1990. Additional Non Championship Twin-shock Specials Class: For machines with twin-shock rear suspension and drum brakes which are not eligible for Classes 3 and 6. This class is intended for competitors to enjoy the principle of this Series with specials which are not eligible. This additional class will be included on both Route A and Route B PLEASE NOTE: FOR 2016 IT IS INTENDED THAT A COMPLETE REVIEW OF ALL THE CLASSES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN AS THE TRIALS AND ENDURO COMMITTEE REMAIN OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORIGINAL PHILOSOPHY OF THIS SERIES IS BEING LOST AND NEEDS EXAMINATION.
  11. Leave well alone, the flywheel you show is the correct one and bike will run fine Only flywheel worth messing with is the one fitted to the 175cc which were lazy to say the least, and I used to turn these down on lathe to try to liven them up, but even that was a bit of a ase of time Usually in such matters Mr Bult got it pretty close, and you will not need to worry about riding it as it will be spot on
  12. Hi Hope I can help In theory your Model 190 would be a 238 Sherpa about 1977 / 78 So - 238 cc BUT many people bored them out to 250cc , not least because there were a lot of 250 pattern pistons available at less cost etc, or just wanted to turn them into 250, or have been bored several times. A 238 in theory can be bored out about 8 times ( although we usually missed a size out to allow for ovality) Even after that Sammy Miller etc used to sell extra size pistons ie 73mm up Ah - the good ole days!!! The 238 had a 71mm bore and earlier ( up to 1975/76 ) all 250cc were 72 mm bore The markings you show are not that important. If you look underneath te piston, on inside skirt, it will tell you 72mm if 250 or 71 if 238 These are standard bore sizes - if there are no markings underneath - just put vernier across and it will be 71 or 71 plus - or 72 or 72 plus - The " plus" I refer to is when it is fitted with an oversize piston. I If you clean the top of piston with some wire wool etc , you will find out if it is " oversize" as it wil be stamped, usually toward front ie + 25, or + 50 or + 75. This means if you had the original 238 piston and +50 on it - size will be 71.50. If you have a 250 piston fitted and it states + 50 it will be 72.50 If not oversize mark ie the + is shown it will be a standard. Wiring - easier. From your engine you should have Black - Connect to your HT coil Green - Connect to a good earth point - I use one of coil mounting bolts ( clean paint off frame) Thats your ignition sorted The yellow only connected if you want lights The red - again rarely connected for brake lights
  13. This is the very point I am trying to make to Pete, there are many who believe that the interpretation the MSA have put on some things may be different to what others believe – and this is exactly why at this time we are more than a little reluctant to say all ACU events that in any way use Public Highway must have authorisation I understand why you think I dismissed exemption ( not quite word but we all know what we mean) point C . The fact is I did not, I thought like you infer that this would enable us to carry on as we were etc. In fact it was my banker, and I have not finished with it yet However, the MSA have said no. I have said, and I really mean it this time I am not going to discuss point after point in an open forum as in my opinion this weakens any defence that someone who inadvertently or otherwise, believed they did not need authorisation . Part C is one I would particularly like to explore more, but I can only assure you 100% that when I raised at meeting we had with MSA I was informed it did not allow us to run within the Act as we thought it should I also stated that we had taken legal opinion, and these posts are forcing me to start putting these on air – but in this particular case I will simplify and say that IF the event was only about riders conforming to the Highway Code and awarded merit for their performance then it could make use of Regulation C . The stumbling block is that the competitor is required to do more than simply comply with the Highway Code. By the “ more” there would be other regulations ( Trials) in place for that event and even if this part were off road – as we know it would be , and that part may /would /could introduce a route to be taken by competitors or if a route is likely to be taken by competitors . This is because the competitor is required to do more ( at some point) than simply comply with Highway Code. Personally ( and I stress this word) I think that a lot of this hinges on what is an “ event” and that needs more careful work And so it goes on. I have not dreamt the above( unfortunately) and all Centres and interested Clubs and individuals were handed sheets which contained much of our legal advice on Nov 17th. At MSA, point C was not acceptable as a means to avoid the legislation. Once more we will take more advice on this interpretation, and I know I have simplified the words. All I can sign off with once more is to say none of this is acceptable, none of this really helps, and little of it is my original work, it has been gleaned for solicitors and speaking directly with MSA . At present, I think that we will once more, probably over the next week or two after speaking and taking more advice, once more try to put all these points into a well reasoned and constructive argument and once more request another ( 4th visit I think) meeting with MSA. Then each and every point can be examined once more, together with any additional advice and paperwork we have complied ( there is some important stuff) . I do not know if this will go much good, but we will try, and so we should.
  14. No, it is not the wrong answer. It is the only answer at present. If you believe it is the wrong answer, then there was no real point in asking the question in first place ? Your concern must in first instance be with your own organisation before worrying about everyone else. If your opinion is that the ACU should at this juncture refuse to issue Permits for events without authorisation , put this forward via your Centre as a proposition. I think we need to make a distinction between leadership and dictatorship. It may well be that in future we will have to make this decision, but we are not there yet. It may be close – but not yet. If we have to take such drastic action in future, I believe we should at least do a lot more work in trying to ease the burden for organisers. We may not be able to change the Act, but we may be able to change the way it is implemented. We may be able to change the time scales, we may be able to change the charges etc Many organisers sincerely believe that they do not need this authorisation and that their interpretation of the Act enables them to run as they have done in past. They may well be inclined to use the fact that there is documentation declaring that Trials should not have been included in first place as a defence should they be incorrect. They may well be inclined to use fact that according to our legal advice – which we would certainly make available to them , that the Act is badly drawn up and ambiguous ( as were many other Acts of that era) I clearly stated at the outset that I was not going to dig a bigger hole for ourselves than we are already in , and that remains. If people are that worried about the ACU issuing Permits for an event that is illegal, the logical step forward is to also worry about issuing Permits for events without being 100% sure that the machines and rider are legal? Sometimes riders and organisers are going to have to make decisions for themselves. Sometimes we are all going to have to use a bit of common sense. While we are still looking at all the possibilities, that is how it shall remain. While there is a chance that we can work with MSA to make it all less onerus – then we will continue working. While we have recognised experts within a matter of days, still trying to see if there is a solution – we will continue to do so. Unfortunately , it may well come to a situation where we will have to say No permit without MSA authorisation – but we are not there yet. It may be getting closer by the day but not yet. Within a week we will be studying very closely a document that was produced by a recognised body that was of the opinion the Act should not nor was ever intended to encompass us. Surely it is worth trying to gather this all together and try to at least make further effort we before we pass out some typical ACU edict of old? At the ACU we are damned if we do and damned if we do not. We have lots of emails declaring we should go easy on it all, and then posts saying we are lacking in leadership if we do so. For me, the sensible option is to wait until the full hand of cards are played out. All organisers know the score, if they are worried they can either apply for the authorisation, or unfortunately as some have done , cancel. There is no easy answer as I thought I had explained and it may well be that difficult decisions are going to have to be made, but they will be with our organisers rather than just thrust upon them. It worries me a little that some people cannot wait to see a rapid decline in events we have treasured for years.
  15. All I can do I think is answer Pete question Yes the ACU will issue you with a Permit If you ( having been made aware ) of the situation and been directed to appropriate guidelines etc we will take the view that you actually know best. I think some of these other posts have given the options quite sensibly. I would love to be able to tell anyone “ No you do not have to do it” or “ just ignore it” – I am afraid I cannot Equally , I or anyone else at this juncture do not wish to say “ You must do this” If organisers are happy that what they have done in past is OK or if their interpretation of the Act gives them enough confidence to just carry on as they were, I think this is what they will do. I know this may sound a bit like sitting on the fence – and that I am afraid is exactly what it is. In all the years of involvement with ACU I do not think I have ever come across a problem where I could not see a solution. It may not have been the correct solution, it may not have been a popular one , but it has been a solution. This time I have to say I cannot see one. One also has to be very careful not to make things worse. I have spent about 3 to 4 hours this morning reading and re reading all the various papers and advice etc , and to be honest every time one thinks there is a if there is a solution, you read a bit more and find a stopper e.g “ a specific route to be taken by competitors , or if a particular route is likely to be taken by competitors . As morning goes one you get more frustrated, especially as the bloody thing was never intended for us in the first place. We are continuing to work on it, next week we have another important meeting and I am sure we will soon after that be having another visit to the MSA. If we can only make things less onerus I would be happier.
  16. I am not going to try to explain everything here on TC – basically as at present that would not necessarily be a good thing to do. I would suggest that there is some good advice in some of the posts such as Andat, but some of you are going to need to use a bit of common sense My problem, is that when anyone from ACU tries to explain it, we come over as defending it – we are not. We are appalled by it – how much more clearer can I make it? Practically all the T & E Committee are heavily involved in running trials which we suddenly find now seem to require this authorisation. Many of us have for years ridden in the same such events. So in simple terms – We ain’t happy, and if anyone thinks we have just rolled over and do not care about any of this – they are idiots – full stop. The Act that is at issue did indeed come into force in 1969. I am no legal eagle but we have ( and are still) taking legal advice on this. It does seem that it is not a particularly well worded or well drawn up document and there certainly seems to be some ambiguity in its wording. Of course, some will immediately jump on bandwagon and declare that this “ ambiguity” should have been challenged and put right 43 years ago . Really? Are we sure about that? For sure, however I think we will all declare that this Act was not intended to unduly influence motorcycle trials who only used the road to get from Farmer Jones farm to Farmer Smith etc. Personally I would think that the time to challenge such an Act was then ie 1969 , and possibly this was done, but it does seem that this was to no avail. Being that it was generally agreed ( and certainly as been since) that this Act it was really intended to bring some control to events like car rallies which often seemed to run through the night etc and have scant regard for people living close to route etc , it does seem that we should not have been involved in first place. However, legislators and politicians were probably not that bothered, and frankly have not been since. I would equally suspect that at a time when there may have been a serious challenge to the very possibility of Motor Vehicles using the Public Highway in any shape or form when in an event , may have resulted in the RAC being more than thankful that such an Act was passed. Where do the RAC ( now MSA for purpose of our interest) come into all this? Well the Government decided that in order to take advantage of the ACT and be legal when using the Public Highway – events would have to have “ Authorisation” and the body they decreed to do this was the RAC/MSA I know I simplify, but space dictates this As the years have gone by possibly this “ ambiguity” or probably a much better word is “ interpretation” has been used. Many quote from the “ guidelines” shown on MSA web site, but we do need to remember that they are just that i.e guidelines and it is the actual Act that will be enforced Let us however quickly look at the 4 guidelines that concern us . They are listed as A, B, C, D, and detail that these events would not require “ authorisation” For purpose of this debate I think we can discard A ( events with under 12 competitors) and D ( events for Armed Forces etc). C : Refers to a Road Safety event ( and I wish to leave this – for now) We have until latter part of last year always believed that our “ interpretation” of part B enabled us to run an event ie Trial , where we actually only used the Public Highway to get from Farmer Jones farm to Farmer Evans farm. Now this is where it is all going wrong. Basically, if most of us read this part B : An event on which no merit is attached to completing the event with the lowest mileage, and in which as respects such part of the event is held on the Public Highway, there are no performance tests and no route, and competitors are not timed or required to visit the same places, except that they may be required to finish at the same place by a specified time. We would be of the opinion that as there are no performance tests etc this part confirms we do not need authorisation for a Trial. You will notice however that a few other words creep in ie No route, not required to visit same places etc The long and short of it is that until latter part of 2012 the MSA were willing ( that does not mean to say they agreed) to concede that our interpretation allowed us to run our events as we have done for last 40 years. With this in mind, and the fact that there seems to have been no problems whatsoever and as far as we are aware no Police prosecutions etc , I think those not trying to just score silly points would agree that the last 40 years have not been wasted, and that maybe, just maybe we were more than happy to use our interpretation rather than mount all sort of challenges. The sad fact also is – how do you mount a challenge to a legal Act? Next – so what changed: Well in basic terms the Dept at MSA who without any shadow of a doubt are the ONLY people who can issue such authorisation , decided that they no longer accepted our interpretation of part D ( or anything else) . They also decided to start checking on events ( we presume via web sites and Regs available etc) and where an event was found to be taking place that had not applied for Authorisation ( and please remember some of our clubs have been doing so for years) the MSA wrote to the organising club informing them that as they had not applied for authorisation, they were in fact running an illegal event . At same time the Chief Constable of area concerned was also informed, and in some cases we are aware that the Police then wrote to organising club informing them they should not be running such an event and were liable to prosecution. Next : Why did the MSA decide to take this stance after so many years? Who actually knows ? It may be that they decided that it was time the “ interpretation” was consistant across the whole area of Motor Sport. We have certainly been informed that all car events including Car trials have had to do it. In simple terms when we visited MSA, I think the message was “ We all have to do it, why not you” I have heard some declare many things from the opinion that it is way of making money, justifying jobs, expanding a Dept and so on. I do not think it is appropriate for me to comment on these on a web site. I will relate an answer that MSA have given us however, and I think we should take some heed of it. Basically the MSA are the sole body for Authorisation – no question. This is a role they regard as very important. Additionally they do not wish anyone or anything to in anyway jeopardise this role. They certainly described that in no way would they want to risk losing this right to “ Authorise” events, as it would have a dire effect on their own events. Playing Devils Advocate: One could see the argument of why should they risk the right to authorise because they consider we have ballsed it up or not done it properly? I do not know if there have been incidents reported by Police to the MSA with concerns about our events? Road legality, Insurance, Number plates and on – we have not been informed of any, but again we have to consider the bigger picture. It may be that a combination of many things have rattled cages – but rattled they have been. So, there we have it. A meeting to discuss/explain where we are/were was called at ACU in Nov and many Clubs and Centres attended and will have information. There are questions on site about will ACU issue Permits - Yes we will. If Clubs and Centres are happy that they do not need authorisation ( as they have done for all these years) then I think they will proceed. The ACU as Governing body however now that it was being brought to our attention by Clubs receiving letters from MSA and Police could not just ignore it. It had to be brought to attention of our Clubs and Centres. I am sure they will take decisions to suit them. Will /have we taken legal advice = Yes . Are we continuing to look at the “ interpretation” that MSA are placing on our events = Yes. Have we dug out all past correspondence on matters ( mostly “ opinion” I have to say ) = Yes Have we explained to MSA what a Trial actually is ( that is about the daftest one I have heard – does anyone actually believe we would not have done that?) = YES. YES and YES Has the ACU introduced this as just another level of bureaucracy = NO NO and NO Does it only apply to ACU events = Absolutely not. Do we have any easy answers ? = No. And we are struggling Are the ACU prepared to spend money on this to take advice/mount a challenge to interpretation = Absolutely Yes. Did ACU offer to put up a “ bond” so that clubs could just send in actual numbers after event +Yes but not acceptable to MSA Did ACU offer to do it all our end and just issue authorisation for events ( and even still send money to MSA) = Yes – not acceptable to MSA Did ACU offer to check routes with C/Course and organisers and make sure all was OK and not untoward = Yes – not acceptable Is it being worked on = Almost every day ( usually by many of those people who constantly come in for criticism for knowing nowt about Trails and are oft described as out of touch etc – but are now expected to give up days and days of voluntary time) Is it being worked on by professional /paid people and not just ACU people = Yes I think that is all for now. The biggest problem by far is that when one reads the parts I have indicated ie Part B – it seems a fairly simple matter. It also seems simple to say that as it has not been a problem for 40 years, why should it be know, OR What has changed. Even worse, if one applies for authorisation, we have to jump through numerous hoops, most of which were never intended for us in first place All these are genuine and understandable questions . In regard to money. On a £50 entry fee for say a car event, £3 may not look too bad. On a £15 entry fee it looks a lot worse? However, we can discuss all these matters till we are blue in face ( and I am sure we will) BUT – the MSA are the Authorising body – and will remain so . In simple terms, if you wish to obtain this authorisation they require xyz. If we do not like zyx ( and we do not) then you do not get authorisation. The MSA did not make this law back in 1969, but they are the body that provide authorisation if we require it. I have tried to put you in the picture.
  17. Set them to 2.5mm BTC Use simple timing gauge down plughole Disconnect all wires at junction box under tank Connect meter or home made bulb/battery continuity tester to black wire one side - earth other so meter needle swings or bulb goes out when points open. You need this to happen at 2.5mm BTC Almost always when you tighten the points screw something will move - so check again - and you can make slight adj by just slight twist on point adj screw BUT as Woody states , these are not GP bikes and if your timing is even close to 2.5mm you will have no problems at all
  18. Ducati 996 agree’s with much of what I say – but decided to give me a lesson in what I should and should not know about his Centre and Club which I should be familiar with? I have no problem with any of that, if it were accurate , and once more not just jumping on a bandwagon in front of a keyboard - which is always my first reason for complaint in first place. Unfortunately once more his views lose validity, as once more he tends to get things out of perspective and decides to use innuendo ( lie the FIM & ACU Gods) rather than facts or truth? Some facts: We belong to the WSW Centre which you are probably familiar with - Well Yes – just a bit. West South Centre Sec for about 20 years – until ACU work forced us to “ beg” past Centre Sec to re- take over- as there were no long queues , and thankfully he took over W/S.W Vice President. Organiser of every Trials licencing seminar there has ever be in order to ensure we had the hard working souls we require to actually put on events instead of just talk. Involved every in only WSW British Adult Championship we run – our club believes bringing a Brit Champ to this area helps inspire young riders along very lines many talk about. Observe at afore said trial –EVERY year , never ever just take up official task with badge, more important to Observe. It is getting help & land to run such a Brit Trials that is our problem , not the marking rules. One of early members of Carmarthen Club – which eventually became to V/Towy – to which he alludes. Organiser of many dozens of WSW Trials – Clerk of Course/ Sec of Meeting/ Putting in sticks/finding the land. Doubt if there has been many years over last 30 when I have not organised at least 1 Centre trial ( usually more until recent ACU work curtailed it) Some years have organised many trials lock stock and barrel. I will not go on – but if Ducati does not actually know what goes on in his own Centre, he should not be so eager to quote from it. I think it just indicates the very points I previously made ie easy to post views – not so easy to get involved at Club/Centre level, As you would know it is a fairly large Centre : No it is not – it is the smallest Centre in the UK and has been for about 30 years if not more. It has the smallest number of active Trials clubs in UK. Why – because of the very points I keep making – people want to talk instead of getting involved. The WSW Clubs have the same few workers year after year . In the last VOT trial there were about 50% of the Observers of approx pensionable age. I suspect they also did a lot more work. Worry about what FIM or ACU does is fine – worry about helpers in own club would be more beneficial. Ducati wants us all , or in particular me to to sort out problems for him - when he does nowt Why? Does s he think I am sort of servant or employee of him or his ilk? In Centre we have about 4 Youth C riders - Not correct , there are more, but many have decided not to compete. One of the reasons is there is not enough events for them – and the one of reasons for this is that too many people are prepared to just on backsides and not put events on – or rely on some other “ gentleman” to do it for them – and moan about not receiving any help? What help is required that you cannot provide for yourself? Youth C & D in Welsh Championship: Yes – the entry in that Championship is low , and Yes it needs looking at – but why do you expect me to do something about it? I attend every Welsh MotorCycle Trials forum I can – and have not missed many over years , but I am not involved in Welsh Championships any more, other than an attendee to try to show support for those who are making an effort to actually do something. I have just looked at the minutes from the early one this year( when rules/policy etc is set) – where the hard working attendees met to try to do something about such matters - You are not shown on the attendance list – did you go? Or was it down to someone else again? Perhaps they missed your name? There has been one since , if you went to that – great you are making an effort to do something about the Youth sport – which is obviously close to your heart . If you did not go however – it is you that are letting that side of sport down. As for having an active role in a club and going to centre meetings to try and sort something out which should have been sorted yrs ago i dont need to when i can speak to the man himself on here. If you read how stupid that sounds – you probably would not have written it. No need for you to get involved – as people should have done it for you years ago - that is just to pathetic for comment You can speak to the man himself on here ? - Why an earth will telling me your woes about Youth C&D in your area achieve anything when I have put a lifetimes hard work into that area and you cannot be bothered to get off you’re a… and do anything or attend anything? I only post on this forum to try to explain to others the thought process that goes into may things and how it all occur – I certainly do not need to or am obliged to , and certainly dross like this posts will incline me not to bother. Criticism is fine – untruth is not. Your own Club were awarded a C&D British Champ least year, they are awarded one this year - is it not a good idea that the ACU were prepared to look further afield and not just go to the same old organisers? In your own Clubs trial on Saturday - there were 9 Observers – were you one of them ? If not why not? Of course if you were Observing - I take my hat off to you and thank you ( but I would have already done that as I certainly thanked every Observer after I rode section for last time) . I make it 9 Observers, I can presume you were not one of the 3 from outside the Club ( inc a C & D parent) you were certainly not one of the 3 hard working long standing club members( or you would not have been talking so much nonsense). However you may have been one of the other two gentlemen – and if so I really do genuinely applaud you as you have fulfilled my 1 to 8 initial survey . Just let us know , and if you were – I will personally run a C& D trial of quality in the start of 2013 at which you will be welcome. It will not rely on numbers to be viable – it will be for C&D riders , regardless of how many turn up. It will run if there 2 or 40. There will be good riders there to coach and adice and help even if I have to go and fetch them myself. All the Trials ( except Trail bike/ Twinshock) in WSW have been Stop Allowed – so it mesmerises me why what happens at WC level has an effect on this. They have been Stop Allowed for many years - so if the C&D class low and it is) - why are the rules to blame? Fortunately – the section plotters in our Centre do a brilliant job, and the severity of sections are spot on for those who ride. True we are not catering for future World Champions, we cater in the main for what we have. The Stop , No-Stop argument has very little relevance, and if the section severity is correct – it has little relevance in many Centres. It is all about putting the sticks in. If you want to know what is to blame – I will tell you . Not enough suitable events for C&D. Too often the sections throughout being far too hard – with SOME pushy parents more interested in trying to turn offspring into World Champions than letting them ride within their capabilities and enjoy themselves. Have you included them in any trials you have run? I have. Why do you not “ get involved” and actually run say just one next year – and I mean run it – not just talk about it , or expect others to sort it out. There is only 1 reason why there are not 6 more C&D or specific Youth events in W SW , not enough people prepared to get involved and run them.. I feel fed up and have got to the point where i dont care who i upset or offend and that includes you Mr Collins. Yes , that is obvious, it is far easier to offend or upset people than actually do something. It is easier to spout inaccuracies rather than take time to find out. It is fare easier of accusing others of doing nothing when nothing could be further from truth. My initial post was aimed at a very basic concept. The concern about rules is not the main problem we are facing. The problem is the same few people are doing the work, finding the venues and running the events. WC and British Championship rules are never ever going to solve these problems and are just a diversion from what we all need to be doing.
  19. Free speech is fine Opinion is fine Of course it is interesting . It achieves ? Absolutely nothing in the context of the title of these posts. There can be no logic whatsoever in saying that FIM, ACU, or anyone else will continue to act like Gods, or not listen, move the sport backwards, or anything else, and then say that there is no real need to be involved. Replace the Gods, Put some effort in. How did the various rules evolve in the first place – not by free speech, but by people trying something different. There were many fee speecher’s who decried the move away from No—Stop in first place , there were many free- speecher’s who decried the move away from 1 for a stop ( probably the best system of the lot?) there were many free-speecher’s who decried the UK for sticking with the 1 for a stop when all others forsook it . Not such a bad idea now many think? If anyone has never attended a Club or Centre meeting and especially a Trials forum in their area or at National level ( the forums are open and are cancelled year after year through lack of attendees) ( wait for the excuses – too far, no time, too busy, nobody listens to me, if only, I would if I could or if someone would come with and hold my hand) then change will be hard to come by regardless of your views. There is a clear misunderstanding of how things work. Not many are really that interested, far easier to just make glib comments about those who put the work in whenever a particular thing does not suit. The people who make decisions do not fall from the sky – they are elected or appointed The FIM and UEM Commissions are made up of people from various Federations. The people in these Federations are made up from people from various areas/regions Centres ( just terminology varies between countries.) The people in these areas/regions/Centres are made up from people within Clubs. It is Clubs who in the main ( coupled with some Promoters) organise trials. I do not know in many decades anyone on FIM/ UEM/ACU/AMCA/MCF/YMSA /ORPA etc who has not come up from grass level sport. Many have been riders organisers or both. Many still are. It is not just an ACU problem , it is across the board - Do as we think, not as we do. I am told it i9s much same in other sports. It is of course a great shame that none of these bodies take into account free speechers, or those with lots of opinions, but there you go If someone is not involved in any of the points 1 – 7 I initially made, they are not actively involved in the organisation of that sport. Of course they can be riders, and that is important BUT it achieves nothing in the terms of change. It is exactly the same as me watching and reading about the Olympics, and then telling the organisers what they should do to ensure they make diving better. There are bound to be many people who have a view on anything and everything. I have no doubt that their capabilities are excellent BUT unless they get involved – it just means theory. It resorts, as I have said before to just expounding how it should all be done – but not actually doing anything. It then follows that when change takes place, for good or bad, the easy option is just to throw out a bit more opinion. There is absolutely no reason why anyone in UK for many years should not be able to ride in a trial they think best ie Stop Allowed or No – Stop. The choice is there. Go along to your own Club and ask them to run the trial of your choice. If there are only a minority of like minded souls, that choice may not be forthcoming – but still no problem, just get the few who agree with your sentiments to help out and run such a trial , and show by example that it works. The Stop and No-Stop rule is a red herring and just allows people to express opinion without making any effort to tackle the real problems – reason, they are boring, difficult and require work. There is no glamour in expressing an opinion about finding and maintaining venues, preventing competitors leaving litter all over a farmers field, driving through the lanes responsibly on way to event, treating Observers with the respect they deserve, occasionally writing to an organiser after the event with a few thanks, looking at the viability of an event in relation to entry fees , trying to fight off legislation which threatens within weeks the very freedom we have enjoyed in UK to run many of our events, and so on and so on – all boring stuff – leave to to the Gods. If the theory is that at anyone’s own Club is running OK - why are so many worrying about World Trials ? Is it just a case of jumping on a bandwagon to express an opinion? Let it runs its course - the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. If nothing else we may then get a chance to have a few years off from this constant bickering about rules that has been a canker in the side of trials for so many years. It can easily move back. How many who were enthusiastic about past World Trials offered any help to the organiser for last year UK WC ? How many will offer to help this year? Once more I suspect down to others Yes there are some very good young riders in UK - and yes we should promote and help them – but hey – here’s a thought – what about putting on a few Youth A & B for them – do not worry about the rules – worry about the lack of events applied for in the 2013 calendar. Is it once more a case of expressing concern and free speech about youngsters, but then hoping someone else will put an event on for them? Make their parents trawl long and expensive distances because the lack of events force little thought is possible as to the geographical placement of Championship events. The points I posed 1 - 8 about some kind of participation are valid . Every rider in the UK could and should be able to achieve at least one of them in any given year. If not stop making excuses and just accept that you are leaving it all to others.
  20. I am going to have one go at this, not particularly to express my own opinion, but to try to get rid of myths and the ridiculous situation of somehow people thinking that they have some god given right to determine what happens at WC level, when they do not ride, do not go there but somehow feel they should be always consulted. Plus there was a question on another post about improving trials generally. Further to this there seem to be dozens of posts wishing to expound how it should all be done, or how they would do it, and a few who actually fancy themselves as being the Guru for all things trials and have all the answers and often childish and naive opinions that we should all insist Trials appears after News at Ten each night, or that they should take Man U v Chelsea off the box and replace it with the highlights of the XYZ trial. Grow up. More than this, and in the real World, if you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Obviously this does not apply to all. Many of posts are by people who are involved and put something back in. However, all too often we hear the moan “we should have been asked” ask the public, or listen to riders and so and so on. Let me also point out that less than 33.3 % of riders from last years British Champ (all were sent to and some from previous year – approx 70- 80) replied. Fact – the large majority wanted Stop allowed – end of. To the cretins who say we do not listen, read a bit more. There was never any intention of just running a No-Stop Championship in 2013. The riders clearly wanted to ride Stop Allowed. There would be a Stop Allowed Championship Obviously, the recent FIM decision had not been made, and in the real world that may of course demand some new thinking. Perhaps not. I do not know yet. To the post who in his dreams suggests that the FIM somehow persuaded the ACU to No-Stop on their behalf - nothing could be further from truth. End of – dream on. All this was before FIM had announced any decision and of course as someone has said, many in the past believed that BC rules should mirror FIM rules, and have for many years. There was criticism last year that this was not case i.e. British rules out of synch with FIM – valid criticism It therefore must be logical that those who expounded that view will now wish it to be same i.e. BC mirrors FIM? True – we had no real idea which way FIM would go, and in order to keep options open we intended to go with a Stop Allowed and a No-Stop series. This may or may not remain case. The two Championship idea did not seem popular to many at the time. Now, I have read many times about people being asked for opinion, people telling others how it should all be done. Many people believe they should personally be consulted on how it should all work, some even ( probably genuinely and sincerely) believe they should be able to decide, BUT then often fail to realise that they make little or no effort to get involved other than tap on the computer keys or play about with a phone People love surveys ( as long as they require no action on their part other than an answer) Humour me and try mine I would like to know from all who have posted , in 2012 Did you: 1) Observe at a Trial 2) Be Clerk of Course at a Trial ( or even Assistant C/Course) 3) Be Secretary of Meeting 4) Help put sticks in ( and I do not mean turn up just before start and offer opinion, I mean actually turn up beforehand) 5) Turn out prior to event for a work party to help, trim, clear etc 6) Turn out and put up route marking or road marking prior to the event 7) Go and knock on landowners door and try to get permission to use land ( the hardest one) 8) Turn up at a Centre or Club Trials Forum or some such Now if you can answer Yes to just one of above, ( and many of us can answer Yes to all) then you are part of solution. If you cannot answer Yes to any then you are part of problem. Do not harp on about rules, regulations and what others should do. You are letting the sport which you profess to love down. Forget all the rollocks about being busy, family commitments, needing to practice every spare minute to be next World Champion that applies to everyone. You are not more important than anyone else. Even on this latest thread, there are some really good sensible ideas, There are good posts, even if we cannot all agree. BUT that is what they will remain, posts on a Web site or on a phone, and will achieve very little until people start to get actively involved. If you cannot answer Yes to any of above – fair enough, but make a resolution for 2013 that you are going to do at LEAST one. Then you will be a contributor and frankly if enough do it, it will have more effect on Trials than any World or British Championship rule change will ever ever have - a theme I will return to. Moving back to the No-Stop debate, and really emphasising what I mention above: There was clearly a strong view even from the contributors to our sport (i.e. not the “No to every question above) that they would like a return to the Stop Allowed BC. Fair enough, valid point and certainly far more valid in past as now riders had tried it, observers had observed it and organisers had organised it (the No brigade had done sod all) BUT BUT BUT, as I have said in previous posts – those who wanted it DID NOT come forward in any number to offer to run a round. This is why the seven points above are so important. It is all very well us all ranting on about rules and Championships. We can have a Championship with completely different sets of rules than has ever been tried (Spain have experimented quite a bit) BUT someone has to run them If the hard working people in a Club favour No-Stop – and I would agree there may be a tendency for them to be shall we say slightly older and looking back to past ( rightly or wrongly) then it is obvious that this will be their view and this is what they will most want to run Conversely, if the hard working people in a Club favour Stop-Allowed – and I would agree that there may be a tendency for them to be shall we say slightly younger and not perhaps experienced the 60/70’s etc) then it is obvious that this may be what they want to run. This is why we have TSR 22A and TSR 22B in the book, and I am sure this will continue. We have to throw in many other factors of course, but the point remains that those actually running events will always have a greater influence than those just wishing to tell people how to do so? It is not rocket science. So , in answer to those who deem themselves the saviour of all things trials – just stop talking/posting twittering and f…facing and do what all other on FIM, ACU , SACU , AMCA, YMSA and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all have done – just start to do it. I have mentioned before that lots of posts referred to what others should do, how they should run the rounds, where they should run round etc. I suggested that this was all valid, regardless of which rules they preferred, just work with your club and apply to run a BC under whichever rules float your boat. Fact: As I have said before, talk is cheap, and those applications did not arrive. So a case of “Do as I say not as I do” Next : just for a while can we divert away from rules and just as a matter of conjecture look at the situation? Fact: Trials bikes sales are not great at moment. In fact they are terrible across the spectrum Who cares? Well we will. If it becomes less than viable to produce trials bikes, there is a possibility some Manufacturers will cease. For many years there have only been a small number of them, and it is good to see some new ones dip toes in water and good luck to them. BUT if these manufactures do diminish so will our choice and if you believe the few that then have the monopoly will not be able to increase prices dramatically so be it. I do not. Trials bike could become an extremely expensive item, merely because they would be made in small numbers for a very specialised marked. This happened with many other non motorcycling things. The result then tends to be a very very specialised sport which is even more expensive to compete in at any level than it is now. Do we really care that much about manufacturers? Well perhaps not. They have brought some economic trouble on themselves with larger and larger wagons, more and more minders and mechanics and so on. But, is their money after all and they can spend it as they think fit – but when sales fall off the cliff, they are bound to be looking for solutions- or laying blame. The Stop or No-Stop rule may be just one thing to look at. It cannot be just co-incidence that at recent Dirt Bike show I think all the UK Importers had Enduro/ Trail type machines in stand? Why? Were they suddenly Enduro/Trail enthusisiats ? No, they were trying to expand their range to try to have additional income streams from just trials bikes. Next – The rules take a hit – whatever you view. Some look back fondly to the good old days when thousands of trial bikes were sold in UK alone. Perhaps/ Probably this is through rose coloured spectacles. But we all do it in many things in life. (Pre breathalyser we always enjoyed a few pints on way home from trial, it was great) Is it as simple as just changing a set of rules and seeing everyone flood back to Trials? Not a chance. But it MAY be one tool in the toolbox BECAUSE – the most important word is PARTICIPATION. Not Stop Allowed, Not No-Stop – PARTICIPATION So what affects this? Lots of things as well as rules. Cost of machines – they ain’t cheap. Cost of spares? Has helped no-one. Look at the price of a trials rear mudguard, con rod, piston. Then go on EBay and see what you can get same items for if you had MX or Enduro? True, the MX items are “pattern” but if the quality of the mudguard is good – who cares stuff? Look at a rear trials tyre – about £80. Look at the price of a reasonable/ usable MX one? So are we being ripped off? Not necessarily so. It is matter of scale and numbers. MX and Enduro have very large number of bikes across the globe. Trials do not. It therefore follows that someone like Acerbis or Poli -Sport can, and do produce things like plastics, Prox things like pistons etc, as there is a big market. That market is just not there for Trials so there are relatively few pattern suppliers for many things. However, the Manufactures could have done a lot more. Easy to blame rules – should they have not at least tried to make some often used spares (linkage bearings for example) more affordable. There will be engineering bods reading these posts, and I am sure you will agree that the price of some items like steel bushes etc are vastly inflated? Additionally, a chap who buys the new breed of Trial/Trail bike – most Trials manufactures have them now, can get a fair bit of use. He can ride it to work or road runs to chip shop, he can trail ride, and he can compete in low key or not so low key trials. I know this as I do it. With a trials bike, he can ride trials or practice – that is about it. So again we are in a much specialised market. All OK, but has to be considered when we keep knocking Importers and Manufacturers, although certainly they need a bit of knocking when year on year they have churned out bikes with same old fault and looked like treating us with contempt with faulty ignitions, faulty clutches etc on bikes which cost a lot, but succumb very quickly, often when just in the shed! It is understandable that the above are looking for a solution, although we would probably all agree that a rule change may not be the answer, but it MAY be part of it. That moves us back to my participation theme. I am fully aware that the World Championship should be the pinnacle of our sport. No question. I am fully aware that TV, PR, etc should enhance all this, and show it as a dynamic sort which will get youngsters queuing up to take part. Fair enough, but does it really? Does it always do this in other sports that get good exposure? We would have to blind to have not noticed that after success of cyclists in Olympics and Tour of France, there was certainly a hell of a lot more cyclists out on roads. This then is a clear indication of top end exposure hugely helping bottom end participation. No question. Probably same for Athletics etc. It is not always the case however. After years in doldrums, the Welsh rugby team gained a lot of success such as Six Nations in recent years; Rugby is almost a religion in Wales. Has it helped the standard and participation below? There was a programme on TV this week showing that at Regional level; things are not good at all. And certainly schools Rugby have not benefited that much? I drink in my local rugby Club; I am starting to think if I go there more than twice a week I will be picked for first 15! Things are on the floor. Plenty of TV coverage and PR for Rugby, Cardiff is a mad and shrine house on International days – but the sport? I did a lot of Athletics in my Youth and College days at reasonably high levels. Many of you will also have been active in School Track and Field. Think back. If you competed for school / college or local harriers etc, which facet had least competitors? i.e. least PARTICAPNTS. Answer – Pole Vault. Why? Certainly before the advent of the bendy fibre glass poles, it was/is a very much specialised discipline, and it was very difficult to master the skill needed. The slow kids can run a 100yds, they can run and jump into the sand – but pole vault – too specialised for the majority? In 60/70/80’s Pony Clubs and riding were immensely popular. Lots of youngsters managed to obtain a Pony. If you ever visited, you would see everything from low key jumping (or not so low) to the sack race. You rarely saw Dressage, even with a bunch of rag tag ponies, it would have been safe, slow and disciplined. Why not, it is much specialised. Needs practice/ training/ patience and high skill levels. Easier to move on to something else? Of course I generalise. But you get the idea. How many of us know guys who have bought a Trials bike and packed in after first year (or less I know probably hundreds as I have sold them the things for 43 years) Is it because it was not dynamic? Is it because the sections were too easy for them, or they did not see themselves on TV? Could it possibly be because they got frustrated with lack of progress and mastering the skill needed? So, back to participation again. For several years there have been dynamic trials at World level. Personally I enjoy watching this far more than watching No – Stop. But, has it helped in participation across the sport? I am not that sure, and I am not sure if armchair sport actually helps us. There are no football teams on a Saturday morning on the four park pitches close to me, there used to be loads. Those who constantly harp on about PR and TV etc. The World Championship of recent years has vastly improved in such matters. We watch Indoor and Outdoor trials. We marvel at the skills of Toni Bou etc I love it. BUT has it actually helped to increase participation? Perhaps it has? Possibly without it things would be worse. Things like the economic situation across them globe and especially Europe cannot be ignored , it is multi pronged problem/ These things however apply to other disciplines. I am very involved in the European Enduro Championship. We have entries of about 100-150 each round in 2011. I was dreading the economic effect on 2012. Round one in Italy there were well over 200 and not that many Italians. We cannot just look at the economics. We have to look wider. Is there also just the faint possibility, as someone else has suggested that it becomes too far off the radar for normal beings? I think us all (even most ardent No-Stop fan) need to admire the skills that these top riders have honed. Same actually applies at BC level and even below. They have practiced them hour after hour and event after event, not only at World or National Championship level but also for Centre level in many cases. It is easy to knock all this, but many of us either did not have ability or were not dedicated to do it. But that in some ways matters not. If a chap buys a trials bike, and wants to compete, and for any reason does not master the skills needed for a reasonable shot at the sport, there is a very big danger he packs it all in. This is a fact The fact that Tony Bou and Adam Gaga are super on TV is all very well for a while, but eventually he realises that the sport is just out of his reach to be even reasonably competitive, so he moves on, often to Enduro/Cross Country (check the names out in results in page) I know many who tried trials for about 6 to 8 months and them sold bike. They are almost all still competing in Enduro. This is the problem, and this is what hinders participation. Once a sport gets out of the ability range of the majority, it starts to flounder. I realise not many like this fact, but it is true. Very specialised sports can certainly exist but all too often there are relatively small numbers. For sure, it is possible to work with small numbers and this should not really be a problem at World level, and this has been situation for many years. Frankly it does not worry me a jot if there are only a limited number of participants in top class. There are only two in a World boxing contest? Ideally, what happens at World level should enhance our sport, encourage young riders to aim for that level and certainly for me that has what it has done for many years. But is it that wrong to want to try something else? Will the top riders now not still earn a wage? Will they take up golf? Why some just so adamant nothing are different should at least be tried? Will there be problems? Yes there will. Will No-Stop see rides flooding back to the sport – Absolutely not, at least not in the short term. BUT any sport or any individuals who are not prepared to ever try anything different will just be encouraging stagnation. There is a view that if we believe that things should filter down from top and influence all below with a dynamic sport, it must also be logical to consider that things could filter up. i.e. the sport is more achievable to more at the bottom, and then as they become better or achieve excellence the top riders become more noticeable. Many sports developed because lots of people were participating at a low level, and as the numbers grew more and more, more and more competitions sprang up and so it went on until there were National and then World Championship to cater for best. When skateboards became a popular pastime, local authorities staring building ramps in parks etc at a great rate of knots. I am hopeful that the advent of electric bikes will prove a boost to our sport. Again - more participation Would top riders in a sport with say 50,000 participants be more prominent than in same sport with? 5,000 participants? Surely it is easier to demand more TV time etc for a sport which has a huge following? There are many sports which would not be regarded as particularly spectator friendly but have a huge participation base. Why do we also associate the number watching a sport more important than the numbers taking part? If we look the hugely popular Pre65 and more recently Twin shock scene, why are their numbers strong – very strong in Spain when modern trials are floundering? Is it because they are all enthusiastic about old bikes – is it hell. Some are of course, but others sell a modern bike, buy a twin shock and then find they can enjoy the sport. It is not the bike, it is not the rules, it is the fact that the sections are easier, more enjoyable and within ability ranges. All too often this was not the case when they rode in a normal trail. Look at the modern classes in Normandale. Those riders are there because the sections are generally achievable. We are all too blame (at least those who are doers). The rules probably have sod all to do with it. It is actually always been about the sections and where the sticks are placed. Probably all the No-Stop rules will achieve is having and influence on this. But if that gets more people back to trials is it not worth a try? At any level. It is ridiculous to even think that because FIM have gone back to No-Stop we can all leap on a bike and tootle up a brook. It will still be too difficult for most BUT may look more in relation to what riders can ride, week in and week out. They may all believe they can improve riding a stream or gully. Many know there is no chance of ever getting up a huge step. It is a matter of perception. I rode in a low key trial yesterday. Stop Allowed. Excellent trial and the rules actually made no difference. The person who put the markers in had catered for the majority. I had no desire to ride No-Stop. I rarely have BUT I do have a desire (as do most other riders) to have an enjoyable day out that allows us participate at our level and our ability range. This is the crux of the matter, and I suppose the real intention of No-Stop decisions of late is to try to influence the section severity. If we could get the section severity correct in first place we would not need No-Stop rules. We all have to admit that far too often we have failed to, achieve this. Ii is not an exact science, it is a difficult one. Next: a person who takes up a sport (and do not be fooled into thinking they are all youngsters – opposite may be true) actually wants to participate in that sport or pastime. They are not necessarily just interested in competing on a Sunday. They may wish to participate on a weekday evening or if they can finish work early. Have a look at the runners out training, the people in a pool or gym mid week, cyclists. The activity prior to an event is enjoyable for them it can also be socially rewarding Trials? read the TC posts about many of us trying to find somewhere to ride, years ago we could all sneak a piece of land to ride on. Those days have gone. Take a look in back of TMX, lots of MX and Enduro tracks for practice. How many Trials ones can you find? Finding somewhere to ride is a bit like looking for Holy Grail. Nothing to do with rules, just another problem In fact that, finding a venue and getting people to actually put the work in to run events is the real problem. It will eventually make Trials marking rules fade into insignificance The biggest problem we will face (as well as finding mugs to do the work) will be LAND. This will be the problem. Rant and rave all you like about Stop or No Stop, we are all burying our heads in sand and being diverted from the real issues. One rule or 10 rules – no venues – no Trials – end of. So, rant on all you like about one set of rules or another, blame all those who are out of touch ( but who are actually one hell of a lot more in touch than many posters) but soon we all have to wake up to the real problems and try to solve a few of them The FIM I think are trying to close the gap between elite and mortals. Will it work – I do not know – but neither do any of you yet. There is no easy answer. It will never be a case of just all the old chestnuts such as TV, PR etc. These are all important, but too many people just hang their hat on them and use them as an excuse for not doing much . Work together, find some venues, and double the number of Trials run in the UK, regardless of rules THEN you will quickly see a big difference
  21. Guys I am not sure here if we are looking for a problem when one does not really exist, or does not exist to any degree I was obviously at show, and decided to renew on line as: (a) I was there and it seemed like an opportunity ( as a Computer numpty, someone would help me if I ballsed it up All was easy and OK – BUT I did not have Code, this was basically because last week in Club I was either too lazy or could not be bothered( it is only Nov after all ) - it was announced in our Club that codes were available etc So, I have renewed by licence ( I pay £43 for Enduro one – although not sure why anymore!) BUT I then get a message saying that I need to send code as I did not submit it – THEN I will get my licence Tonight I will pay club membership and get code So - I certainly was not able to bypass the system and my Club will lose nowt I do not know if a few have slipped through net, but without being clever, if I did not, I suspect not many would have. There were a lot of reservations about the online renewal last year , but I think it was a big step forward and I think ( I certainly hope) that Clubs have not missed out – mine certainly has not
  22. Before everyone starts going off on various adventures of what should and should not happen I think we need to take heed of some basic facts. Please also note that after initial posts about the 2012 BTC format, I posted very little as for me it was important to see what actually would happen rather than what people thought or predicted what would happen without any actual evidence and far too often any experience or even attendance at rounds. Without spending a long time going over old ground a few points There were certainly some plus points i.e. There were certainly more riders in the Championship class, and for me at least it was good to see some very able riders who had given up on the previous Championship back. It would be dishonest to try to claim that all these returning riders were all No-Stop fans, although of course some where. But it was evident that the severity of the sections suited them more than in past, when they clearly just ditched the Championship. There was no real significant increase in the overall entries however. Some may argue that on the 2011 format and with increased travel costs and so on, if there had been no change, the entries would have been low in any case, and this may be borne out by falling entries in other events, but this is hypothetical and no-one actually knows, but the total entry numbers have not really significantly changed. There is no doubt that many Observers, even if minded toward No-Stop did find making judgments at this level more intense, and not all enjoyed it. Please remember here these guys are volunteers, and without them it just ain’t going to happen in any shape of form. To be fair, there was no real issue that was reported of abuse to Observers, although I fear one or two riders did get away with it, and with exception of a few in the last round I thank MOST riders for at least taking this on board. There is also no doubt that riders often got frustrated when they thought they had not stopped, or that the Observer should have been more lenient, but again MOST handled it well. For me it is important that this took place as it would have given entirely the wrong impression if Observers had been very lenient and made No-Stop look far more easy to Observe than it actually is, and equally it would give wrong impression if we doctored and made a particular Stop Allowed event far easier section wise than they normally are just to prove that point We have what we have and everyone is going to have to accept that. Spectators: I have read a fair bit of nonsense on this one, and again a lot is hypothetical. It is easy to get the impression that spectators were flocking to these events prior to 2012 – they were not if you take the whole series rather than just one or two. And before a truckload of people post and start on about PR , Better this and better that, it is another issue and falls into the category of giving advice and getting someone else to do something while the advisor usually does sod all For sure, a lot of spectators were clear that the No-Stop year did not give them the thrill/excitement they wished to see, and may spoke to me that they found it rather boring There were some , but I would certainly say less, who actually told me they enjoyed watching riders – and especially the top few , tackle sections in the No-Stop format as they appreciated the skill set more than they did seeing these riders tackle a huge step etc. Perhaps it was just that they could associate their own riding more with what they saw? I have to be honest however and report that most who spoke to me stated they had preferred watching in 2011 and prior. Personally I felt the Expert course did encourage more Centre based riders to tackle the Expert course, but again I appreciate that the Expert B course should really have achieved this in past. So – what happened next? All riders who rode in 2012 received a simple questionnaire asking if they preferred Stop Allowed or No – Stop. We also included some who had ridden consistently in Champ class in 2011, but for some reason were unable to do so in 2012. We deliberately made it a simple question as I particularly did not want it influenced by what I call the dreadful “IF” factor i.e. : I prefer No-Stop as long as the Observers are lenient and give me the marks I think I deserve, or as long as they are all perfect Observers etc OR: I prefer Stop – Allowed as long as the sections are not too severe for me with no big steps etc I hate the IF factor. I often say “I would holiday in UK “IF” someone would guarantee me good weather” or “If my Auntie had balls she would be my Uncle” Again: We have what we have. The best comment ever was made on TC by someone (sorry cannot remember who) “The best system is Stop Allowed” marking with “No-Stop” sections I think this is spot on and what actually happens in many Centres, but for British Championship has not really ever been consistently achieved OK – So we canvassed Riders – like so many on TC emphasised we should (as in fact we had in past) I have to tell you that only about 50% bothered to reply which any way you dress it up is disappointing. We also invited comments from Organisers and through them Observers and we also invited the view of the Importers. We did not invite the views of everyone on TC , Web pages, Face book and so on as this is unrealistic and most have already expressed views in past. Result: No shadow of a doubt of the riders who replied the vast majority preferred Stop Allowed – end of. Other opinions: As you can guess, varied. Many thought 1 year was not enough to see true picture etc and that time would tell ( one of the reasons we have continued with it) Many felt that eventually FIM may move to No-Stop Quite a lot of opinion that the 1 for a Stop was best system we ever had (remember ACU stuck with this long after everyone else and were criticised for doing so) I think there is no doubt whatsoever that the few very top riders hated No-Stop and felt this was not giving them the practice/challenge they deserve - we never ever denied this,. Equally there is fair acceptance that it is very difficult to cater for the top three and those further down the line. We may achieve it with perhaps another 4 or 5 and that brings us back to realistic 6 to 8 riders in Championship class. This may or may not be acceptable So: For 2013. Please remember that in 2011 and before there was no huge enthusiasm and applause of the current Championship. I am still looking for the one person who thought it was great? Let us also be fair and admit that there has been no huge enthusiasm and applause for 2012. It is very easy to sate, as I am sure many will – It is obvious the No-Stop experiment has not worked – and they will give a whole host of reasons why we should return to old format. Fair enough – but as always 99.9999% want others to do so. In others words exclaim with great passion how it should all be, as long as they do not have to do it. Equally, the advocates of No-Stop fall into same category. Exclaim with great passion how it should all be, as long as they do not have to do it. In both cases we constantly hear about if so and so took it over or if someone else did this or that it would be fantastic Simple message: No interest in either format has been expressed by anyone outside the hard working Clubs/centre regardless of format – end of. All those who in many posts last year wanted to return to Stop Allowed unfortuanatly did not do as I asked then and actually volunteer to run a round. As an aside , it is even worse in the British Enduro Championship with some right dreamers including some well known names having all sorts of theories of how it should be as long as they do not have to do it or find someone to do it Only 2 Organisers have indicated they would run Stop allowed in 2013 and another 2 will run either format However – Only 2 Organisers have indicated that they will run No-Stop in 2013 and another 2 (Same 2) will run either In simple terms we have 2 organisers for No Stop, 2 for Stop allowed and 2 will do either. As I have said before – talk is cheap. So For all reasons stated we will run a British Stop allowed Championship. In attempt to make it easier to spectator, promote etc it will be on small venue course. Sections will be able to cater for our best riders and those with proven ability. More details obviously to be worked out. Someone has already mentioned the N.Berks trial – this is the sort of idea, and they will certainly be invited to participate. In addition there will be a No-Stop Championship – and this will more or less be the same format as 2012. Probably 4 rounds. It is true this may echo the S3 Part concept BUT they will be off road and while the S3 is able to use lots of varied terrain obviously these will be limited to one venue, as they were in 2012. Riders will have the choice. It is clear what they will get Unlike 2012 no-one can claim anything has been “thrust upon them” If they do not like a particular trial – obviously they will not enter. The Organisers will have to accept this in either case. Yes it is trying to cover both basis, yes it can allow for any changes outside our control
  23. I did say that I was not going to turn a simple post about statistics into one about finance and so on, and I also accept that Shedco did not attempt to so either However , when I stated that the statement that the ACU is loaded and making large profits etc is a myth, I stand 100% behind that remark. I am not an accountant, and frankly wading through accounts and statistics is about the thing I least enjoy. However, as Vice Chairman and Director of a company, who therefore by definition may be held financially accountable on a personnel note ( as are other Directors) I do have a fairly good idea of the state of play You can never win on any debate such as this , as statistics and figures can be used out of context and often accounting procedures, time of closing accounts etc all have an influence What I can tell you , is if you look past selective part of accounts – and move to the bottom line which will show the “ Profit for Financial Year” - the figure for the year ending 2011 states £925. I think I made more than that selling some odd crap on EBay last year! However, in the same vane as I state that accounts read often as one wants to read them, I would equally say that I am never that convinced about any bottom line in any accounts – For me – there is a very simple litmus test. If the ACU are making large profits and year on year increasing its bank balance and sitting on large pots of money for sake of it or just to accumulate wealth when it could be doing far better things, this in my opinion would be totally wrong, and I for one would be ready to walk away from the whole shooting match. I appreciate that everyone will never agree with what I say on any subject ( life would be a very boring place if we all did) BUT – I do not ever intentionally tell lies – it is a rule of mine. I can be wrong, I can be mistaken – but I never intentionally lie on a subject. The hard fact is, that if the ACU can this year and next, pay its bills, and do exactly what it is doing now – I for one will be over the moon. It is not raking in money, it is struggling to maintain its current position Perhaps I should look at “ assets” - and while not an expert as I have said , I have been told by those who know that the figure shown is not enough. This apparently has to do with all sorts of things, not least in order to protect our Clubs and Centres. I do not intend to go into huge detail on an open forum – but older readers I think ( certainly Centre Officials) will remember a situation in Matchams MX park – many years ago now If that situation arose again now, we would worry one hell of a lot about assets in the bank ( or certainly I would) Let me give a few simpler examples. Insurance. Like on our cars – we have things for want of a better word called excess ( not quite right term in this context) It is often £25k or more. So in a given year, if there were 10 claims to pay out which fell under this part ( obviously not all do) that can add up to ¼ million in a year. Some claims can be on books for years – for example, a 6 yr old Youth does not need to submit a claim just before his/her 21st birthday , so realistically there can always be 15 years of claims in the pipeline. In order to even partly account for this, a reserve needs to be kept. Equally the ACU for last few years has its own Insurance company ( ACUI) dealing with a certain layer of claims – this money has to come out of assets . This is a forward looking incentive which will probably bear fruit some 10 years hence ( hopefully) and perhaps put our younger riders in a better position than we do know with finding realistic Insurance costs. We also have an incentive called a “Captive” which again can draw on ACU reserves when required. The figures involved are big – very big. This last point is very very important . The ACU , and probably other Federations pay for Insurance of a sort of total sum principle ie not event by event. Usually, in order to get best deal for our riders and organisers ( and people who like balance sheets need to look at fact that we manage to hold event premiums quite well in difficult times) it is usually a 3 year deal. Now – if all goes to plan, and the amount we are due to pay is collected in – happy days. So if for example the total Insurance payment due was £1.5 million and we collect £1.5 million – great. If we collect £1.6 million even better ( but it just ain’t happening these days) HOWEVER – if we collect only £1millioin in insurance payments , the nice Insurance man still wants his dosh., Result – ACU has to find ½ million perhaps each year for 3 years – this may explain why reserves are needed. Is it likely to happen? Unfortunately yes if we are unlucky. Remember DEFRA when lots of events were cancelled? Remember Foot & Mouth? Just a few examples of how numbers fall dramatically and hence the collection of insurance monies from events. Certainly the present economic climate will not help to maintain numbers? Mr Insurance will still need his payment each year – hence the need for reserves. Frankly, if they are not there, they are not going to be knocking on your door – but they may on mine. Any company who does not hold these reserves has Directors who are irresponsible at best, and probably legally deficient as well ( FSA) As I said – all complicated stuff. It always boils down in end to people who believe there is this huge wealth just lolling about – sorry no It also boils down to people being easily able to say on a site or in Press – well you should not waste money on this – but you should spend more on that etc etc. This happens in all walks of life, and certainly in our day to day employment ie we believe those at top could spend better etc There is no real problem with people thinking this – I think I did too if I am honest, BEFORE I got more involved At end of day – it is very easy in some ways to act upon – A person who has answers on finance matters and has concerns on how ACU monies are collected / spent just stands for an ACU Director. In many cases , it is not as time consuming as standing for a Sport Committee ( they do not deal with ACU finance as such ) Actually, if one looks back as Elections, the record will show that very few people ever do this, and when someone stands down or retires there never seems to be a great queue to replace them ( I certainly had no desire to be an ACU Director until rules changes an Committee Chairman had to) Finally Finally - I hope this has cleared up a few things – although we all accept this was not intention of post or postees since I have always said however, that those who are convinced that ACU is this huge rich body just screwing the riders – I would be prepared to sit down with them in Rugby and actually look at it all – we can have 3 Independent people from TC if you like. Everyone travels to Rugby –we spend a day on it. I will spend a day or two preparing papers If at end of that those concerned then believe the ACU is raking it in and making these huge profits – I will pay £500 out of my own pocket to Cancer Research. All I ask is that anyone instigating this should be prepared to put up £500 from their pocket to the same charity if proved wrong At end of day – frankly , if we as Trials riders are finding the initial payment of £10 ( see other posts on Forum ) as too onerous for a years sport , I am afraid I just cannot comprehend this is any shape or form – which is where I came in .
  24. I can see that Atom Ant did not set this post off as a debate on the money side - I think I was guilty of going off on that tangent - so sorry Not to get too embroiled in the money side of things - as everyone applies their own logic to this -which is often very flawed indeed and is often looked at in a very selective way without any reaslistic idea of the actual facts, I will just answer the question asked about book, CD and so on It was a few years ago when I last looked at some actual figures in regard to this - but roughly I would say that the cost of production of the handbook and the postage in sending it out , plus the magazine cost and sending it out took up the £10 We have had all the arguments about this before so I have no intention of going into it all again, suffice it to say that all the legal advice we have had over the years , and experince in fighting claims etc have indicated that tyhe handbook is very important, and until we are convinced otherwise, we will continue with it Also remeber that it is sent out to licenced Officials ( obviously they do not have to pay) and this to me is important. The protection of our Officials alone is of paramount impoprtance I have said that I am not going to go into finances , but one thing does need stating is that each discipline contributes via licences or rides, and each discipline has costs, simples - however thge clue is in last letter of ACU ie Union, and therfore as a multi disciplined Federation, things are complicated , for example, one disciplkine cannot exxpect all the others to pay foor light, telephones, rates and so on.There is a common thread which has to be shared. I am afraid Shedco is miles off the mark if he thinks the ACU is "loaded" - and I know he may think that I would say that, it is however a myth in this day and age for practically all Federations throughout world.
  25. I am afraid as others have pointed out it is never going to be a simple excercise, and any figures tend to be distorted for reasons given I use myself as an example. I have ridden Trials for 40 years , ranging from over 40 events each year for perhaps the first 20 years and reducing afterwards steadily down to about 10 - 15 these days BUT - for about 30 years I would not appear as a Trials riders as I have always taken out an Enduro licence !!!!!!!!!!!! One day I must try to find someone who knows a bit about ACU and point out that I have been paying ( this year for example) £43 for my licence plus £1.50 levy each time I have ridden - probably the chances of me riding an Enduro again are the same as me appearing on the X factor - but there you go - habit I suppose We can establish how many rides there are ( and all the things to do with money are in annual accounts which every Centre and therefore Clubs get) - but even that does not give a true picture ie If 100 rides are recorded is it 1 guy riding 100 times or 10 guys riding 10 times or a zillion combinations in between? As far as Trials Registration ( often reffered to as licences) go - if one works on about 8000 per year that is close BUT - that does not mean that all these ride trials . Many, I suspect, a bit like me with my Enduro licence just take it out from habit, many because they perhaps intend to finish that bike in the shed and have a go that year, and many becuse they have also done so and believe that paying £10 gets them a handbook ( or CD) the weekly newsletters, the magazine a few times a year etc Also without banging the old ACU drum, for myself , as soon as I hang up my boots( which seems to be arriving a bit too quickly these days) I will still pay my £10 for reasons stated, but also as I am fully aware of the amount of work that has gone on and is going on behind the scenes, which has allowed me to ride in motorcycle sport for all these years - sorry if that sounds a bit like propoganda - but it is true none the less and I honestly feel my £10 is important for future, regardless of any ACU position
 
×
  • Create New...